'NMS Was a Mistake' - Dev Truth or Server Hack?

No Man's Sky News - According to reports across several media and reported first by Polygon, Hello Games' Sean Murray ostensibly posted a Tweet saying "No Man's Sky was a mistake". The Tweet has since been taken down and the Twitter account has been set to private. Long after the original post, Murray posted that the server was hacked and that "it was using Linked In without 2FA".

He mentioned before he feels like don't want to release this game in one interview . I just want to know who forced them or they did all this crap conscious. Any way Sean killed his carrier in Gaming industry

He mentioned before he feels like don't want to release this game in one interview . I just want to know who forced them or they did all this crap conscious. Any way Sean killed his carrier in Gaming industry

well for a persective if you made some thing like $25 million dollars on a scam would you care that your career is over? i dont know how much it was by the way its just that appears he did bank

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

Sony tossed them over the angry mob and made them promise things and tell lies... Now they are over the pyre, getting burnt like a witch, while the barons of Sony are looking from their windows counting their gold and laughing.

Not defending them in any regards.

My point is: If you'll burn a witch, you should burn all of them. People are pissed with the devs for their lies, with reason, but are forgetting to blame those who knew all the time it would be a scam and did nothing about it besides collecting the money from the pre orders and day one purchases.

Sony lost a promising but small to nonexistent dev team - but that was a fair price for the sell numbers in both consoles and the title itself. Leaving it behind with no fault on their shoulders whatsoever.

Also, Sean already said it was an employee using the acc (or is it a lie again?) so, no, it's not a hack.

- Steam ID- Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear."Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.

Sony tossed them over the angry mob and made them promise things and tell lies... Now they are over the pyre, getting burnt like a witch, while the barons of Sony are looking from their windows counting their gold and laughing.

Not defending them in any regards.

My point is: If you'll burn a witch, you should burn all of them. People are pissed with the devs for their lies, with reason, but are forgetting to blame those who knew all the time it would be a scam and did nothing about it besides collecting the money from the pre orders and day one purchases.

Sony lost a promising but small to nonexistent dev team - but that was a fair price for the sell numbers in both consoles and the title itself.

would that include burning a community that alters the outcome of reviews by a large margin based on what the developer said and not the game itself, even more so given that its likely not a single person actually bought that game thinking it was multiplayer.

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

No, he blatantly built hype to extreme heights, admit it, this game was the Holy Grail of gaiming for the next decade as the hype was built.Then this game releases, enormous amounts of ppl preorder and buy it, and then the game proved to be a dud.

So yeah, disgruntled players loved to burn the game down.

That's what happens with dissatisfied customers who have been lied to.They do not have the power to sue them, so how to get back at the devs?

'Burn the game to the ground and the devs reps along with them.'

"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

No, he blatantly built hype to extreme heights, admit it, this game was the Holy Grail of gaiming for the next decade as the hype was built.Then this game releases, enormous amounts of ppl preorder and buy it, and then the game proved to be a dud.

So yeah, disgruntled players loved to burn the game down.

That's what happens with dissatisfied customers who have been lied to.They do not have the power to sue them, so how to get back at the devs?

'Burn the game to the ground and the devs reps along with them.'

let me try to answer your question by asking you a point blank concrete question of which I will hope to receive an honest answer from and said question SHOULD illustrate the point I am making but if not I will explain

Do you think anyone bought the game thinking there was actually multiplayer in it?

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

No, he blatantly built hype to extreme heights, admit it, this game was the Holy Grail of gaiming for the next decade as the hype was built.Then this game releases, enormous amounts of ppl preorder and buy it, and then the game proved to be a dud.

So yeah, disgruntled players loved to burn the game down.

That's what happens with dissatisfied customers who have been lied to.They do not have the power to sue them, so how to get back at the devs?

'Burn the game to the ground and the devs reps along with them.'

let me try to answer your question by asking you a point blank concrete question of which I will hope to receive an honest answer from and said question SHOULD illustrate the point I am making but if not I will explain

Do you think anyone bought the game thinking there was actually multiplayer in it?

Yes. I think a lot of people preordered this thinking their was multiplayer in it. Another cautionary tale against preordering.

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

No, he blatantly built hype to extreme heights, admit it, this game was the Holy Grail of gaiming for the next decade as the hype was built.Then this game releases, enormous amounts of ppl preorder and buy it, and then the game proved to be a dud.

So yeah, disgruntled players loved to burn the game down.

That's what happens with dissatisfied customers who have been lied to.They do not have the power to sue them, so how to get back at the devs?

'Burn the game to the ground and the devs reps along with them.'

let me try to answer your question by asking you a point blank concrete question of which I will hope to receive an honest answer from and said question SHOULD illustrate the point I am making but if not I will explain

Do you think anyone bought the game thinking there was actually multiplayer in it?

Yes

sorry but I do not believe you believe that.

but fair enough carry on

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

No, he blatantly built hype to extreme heights, admit it, this game was the Holy Grail of gaiming for the next decade as the hype was built.Then this game releases, enormous amounts of ppl preorder and buy it, and then the game proved to be a dud.

So yeah, disgruntled players loved to burn the game down.

That's what happens with dissatisfied customers who have been lied to.They do not have the power to sue them, so how to get back at the devs?

'Burn the game to the ground and the devs reps along with them.'

let me try to answer your question by asking you a point blank concrete question of which I will hope to receive an honest answer from and said question SHOULD illustrate the point I am making but if not I will explain

Do you think anyone bought the game thinking there was actually multiplayer in it?

Yes

sorry but I do not believe you believe that.

but fair enough carry on

I do. Because like it or not people fall for marketing. That's why companies spend billions on it. You'd think people would know better but time and time again people prove they don't.

I am not trying to defend Sony or Hello on this but I have to say the community was fairly trollish about this whole thing

No, he blatantly built hype to extreme heights, admit it, this game was the Holy Grail of gaiming for the next decade as the hype was built.Then this game releases, enormous amounts of ppl preorder and buy it, and then the game proved to be a dud.

So yeah, disgruntled players loved to burn the game down.

That's what happens with dissatisfied customers who have been lied to.They do not have the power to sue them, so how to get back at the devs?

'Burn the game to the ground and the devs reps along with them.'

let me try to answer your question by asking you a point blank concrete question of which I will hope to receive an honest answer from and said question SHOULD illustrate the point I am making but if not I will explain

Do you think anyone bought the game thinking there was actually multiplayer in it?

Yes

sorry but I do not believe you believe that.

but fair enough carry on

I do. Because like it or not people fall for marketing. That's why companies spend billions on it. You'd think people would know better but time and time again people prove they don't.

I agree on your general statement however on the specifics of multiplayer and NMS I do not.

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

I also think that the publisher had a lot to do with it. This hype train has to leave the station before people figured out it was going to be a mess.

yeah but 'a mess' is different from specifically multiplayer being in the game or not in the game. The purpose of my assertion was to focus like a laser on that aspect specifically.

I dont think people bought this game (as in at the point of purchase) thinking there was multiplayer in the game. They have have 'bought into' the game weeks or months before thinking that multiplayer was 'going to be in the game' but at the moment of purchase I do not think anyone thought there was multiplayer IN the game at that time.

does that make it more clear perhaps?

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

i just looked at the back of the box. If you walked into a store knowing nothing about this game I'd say you would think it's single player only. It clearly states that.

If you look at online stores like Amazon it doesn't show the back of the box and says their is online play. Most people equate online play with multiplayer. Correctly or incorrectly it's just a conclusion I assume most people would jump to.

So yes I think some people did buy it thinking their would be MP. Do I think it was millions of people? Absolutely not. A few thousand? Probably.

I also think that the publisher had a lot to do with it. This hype train has to leave the station before people figured out it was going to be a mess.

yeah but 'a mess' is different from specifically multiplayer being in the game or not in the game. The purpose of my assertion was to focus like a laser on that aspect specifically.

I dont think people bought this game (as in at the point of purchase) thinking there was multiplayer in the game. They have have 'bought into' the game weeks or months before thinking that multiplayer was 'going to be in the game' but at the moment of purchase I do not think anyone thought there was multiplayer IN the game at that time.

does that make it more clear perhaps?

I personally thought there would be a pseudo-multiplayer component to it.

I love exploration and community. The way it was pitched made me assume those two would be linked. It was obvious there would be no direct multiplayer. You would not be running around with your friends. You would not be building, killing or trading together.

But I assumed you would have an impact on the world. People visiting the worlds you discovered would then see the impact you made. Likewise, you'd travel places where people had left stuff. The ecosystem would respond to your behaviour on a global level. In a sense, you would be part of the game. Even if apart, players would be collectively linked by the universe itself.

This was directly stated in the interviews. I did not have grand expectations, but I was looking forward to some foundations of the above. Instead, everything is pretty much static, with no impact from the players whatsoever.

- Steam ID- Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear."Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.

I agree on your general statement however on the specifics of multiplayer and NMS I do not.

One news story long ago said there would be PVP in the gameSean said on TV that to see yourself another person would have to be looking at youSean said in several interviews that people could interact together

When denying multiplayer, Sean NEVER said multiplayer was not in the game. He said "people looking for the multiplayer EXPERIENCE" would not find it. Many people took that to mean because the universe was so big, that much of the time you would be alone but that there was some form of multiplayer in the game.

For you to insinuate that no one should have expected multiplayer in some form after the number of times Sean specifically mentioned it on TV and in interviews is just silly.

"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD

I did not buy it thinking there was multiplayer. I don't even know if anything was missing that was promised I can do everything they showed in the videos to the game is just boring though. You do the same thing over and over.

I am not sure why my point is hard to understand. I am saying at the point of purchase I do not think anyone was actively at that point buying the game with money under the assumption that multiplayer was in the game at the point of purchase.
This DOES matter, mostly legally but in other matters around this subject as well.

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

I agree on your general statement however on the specifics of multiplayer and NMS I do not.

One news story long ago said there would be PVP in the gameSean said on TV that to see yourself another person would have to be looking at youSean said in several interviews that people could interact together

When denying multiplayer, Sean NEVER said multiplayer was not in the game. He said "people looking for the multiplayer EXPERIENCE" would not find it. Many people took that to mean because the universe was so big, that much of the time you would be alone but that there was some form of multiplayer in the game.

For you to insinuate that no one should have expected multiplayer in some form after the number of times Sean specifically mentioned it on TV and in interviews is just silly.

I repeat

At the point of purchase, if the player at that point in time believed there was multiplayer in the game at the point of transaction then that is a problem of which could turn into a legal issue

however, at the point of purcahse when the transaction took place, I do not believe there are people who believed that there was multiplayer in the game at that time. This matter a lot. Because there is a very large difference between broken promises of what would happen in the future without money exchanging hands yet and selling something AT THE POINT OF SALE with the user under false pretenses about what is actively in the product at the point of sale.

HUGE diffference

as an example.

'I am building a vacation home which I think you will like it will have these features, when I am done come back with money ready'

and

'you bought the house, at the point of transaction I told you it had a pool, you were buying the house with the understanding at that time that the pool was actually there, but it was not'

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

The reason I am suggesting the two difference matter greatly is because its fairly common for developers to 'suggest' something is going to be in a game or even 'going to be' and then when the game is out its not there. That doesnt make it just but it is reality and fairly common.

However, the community was acting as if at the point of purchase they believed there was multiplayer and where surprised that there was not. That is being as misleading an Hello Games where about MP being in the game, it was trollish.

just one example of 'is going to' and 'end up not being' is American Truck Simulator that got delayed. when they said it was to be released it did not get released. does that mean they are evil monsters who eat childern? i dont think so

Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.